Talk:Hypothetical trans-Neptunian planets

Astronomy: Astronomical objects Redirect‑class

	Astronomy portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

/archive 1

Proposed merger

User:Serendipodous had proposed that this article be merged with Planet X. I certainly see his rationale, but I believe that the encyclopedia is better served by having

one tightly-defined article on "Planet X" in the distinct sense of the now-disproven gravitationally-rooted hypothesis running from the late 1800s to late 1900s
and a separate article (this one), more broadly looking at the idea of unknown planets in the outer solar system, including Eris' brief status as a "tenth planet," and today's theories related to the Kuiper cliff and comet deflection.

It's already been a bit frustrating trying to keep the Sitchincruft out of these articles and clarifying that "Planet X" =/= "Planet 10" =/= "Every outer solar system planet theory ever," and I feel blending these topics together again muddies those waters. Lowell's Planet X is a fascinating self-contained narrative about hypotheses advanced and disproved (and a great illustration of scientific method), and I do really like how we've managed to put together a pretty solid article on it. I, for one, as recently as the early 1990s, remember doing a school project on Planet X and how there were these apparent outstanding gravity issues, which was very much still un-disproven at the time.

I believe I've managed to make sure that the better-written content over on Planet X has been used to replace some of the pretty shoddily-written and -sourced content that was here. The Tom (talk) 18:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article needs to change its name to something like Planets beyond Neptune. There is very little information in this article about hypothetical planets. Also, I would contest the usefulness of the "Proserpina" section. It may be true, but it is completely unsourced and also somewhat out of date. Eris was very deliberately NOT named Persephone because that was already the name of an asteroid. Serendi ^podous 18:50, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]